ARIZONA SENATE IN A BLATANT KISS ASS CRONYISM HAS APPROVED IN A CONFERENCE COMMITTEE paved the way for FORMER SENATOR RUSSELL PEARCE'S recall reimbursement...
REVISION OR NO REVISION (Please read the following Summary sheet on SB 1449
Please also read the following fact sheet on SB 1449: 2.http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/2r/summary/s.1449jud_house%20changes%20memo.pdf Please read a copy of the SB 1449: 3.http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/2r/bills/sb1449h.pdf)
I DISAGREE A 100% THAT NO ONE NOT EVEN PEARCE SHOULD BE REIMBURSED BY THE TAXPAYER FOR RECALL OR CAMPAIGNS FOR ANY REASON. WHEN ONE RUNS FOR AN ELECTED OFFICE IT’S EITHER WIN OR LOSE THEY KNOW THIS GOING IN. THEY ALSO KNOW THEY CAN BE RECALLED BY THE PEOPLE FOR WHATEVER REASON. IN PEARCE’S CASE I VEHEMENTLY DISAGREE THAT HE SHOULD BE PAID. HIS REPORTS SHOW ALL OF THE MONEY WAS FROM CONTRIBUTIONS AND THE MAJORITY WAS FROM OUT OF STATE.. Secretary of State records shows the recall campaign has a $2,500 + cash balance. ( Recall http://www.azsos.gov/cfs/FilerDetail.aspx?id=201200123# Election http://www.azsos.gov/cfs/PublicReports/2012/F0308891-08E8-4DF7-940E-C4FE17DBB528.pdf
THIS IS A CLEAR CASE OF CRONYISM AT THE EXPENSE OF THE TAXPAYER. ANY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE OR SENATOR WHO VOTES FOR THIS TRAVESTY SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE. IF IT DOES MAKE IT TO THE GOVERNOR'S DESK AND SHE DOESN'T VETO IT...SHE NEEDS TO BE RUN OUT OF THE CAPITAL BUILDING ON A RAIL TARRED AND FEATHERED....be ###
Pearce allies OK legislation to pave way for recall reimbursement
By Luige del Puerto
Published: May 2, 2012 at 5:18 pm
Allies of former senator Russell Pearce secured a critical step in pushing for legislation that creates the framework for reimbursing officials who face recall elections.
The proposal could pave the way for Pearce to get a reimbursement of more than $260,000 — the amount his campaign spent defending him last year, when he was ousted from the Senate in a recall election.
The legislation, which was adopted in a conference committee this afternoon, still needs the approval of both the House and the Senate.
It’s unclear whether it has the support to pass.
In any case, it will likely split the Republican caucus, some of whom indicated they oppose the proposal since Pearce didn’t spend his own money during the recall election.
It has also drawn harsh criticism from Pearce’s foes.
But his allies argue that legislators are constitutionally bound to make the reimbursement, and the Arizona Constitution mandates the Legislature to create the framework for reimbursing recalled officers.
The passion from both sides was clearly on display during the committee hearing this afternoon, which attracted lawmakers and onlookers.
Sen. Steve Smith, a Pearce ally who chaired the meeting, threw political organizer Randy Parraz and at least two others out of the room after the activists spoke uninvited.
Parraz and his group, Citizens for a Better Arizona, spearheaded the recall effort against Pearce last year.
After the hearing, Parraz asked why Pearce, when he was still Senate President, and Biggs didn’t address the constitutional provision on reimbursement last year.
“A year later after he loses, now his Tea Party folks come in here and at the end of the legislative session at a late afternoon (hearing), they shut down public comment and don’t let people come forward,” Parraz said.
“It’s a dog-and-pony show. It’s all about Russell Pearce,” he added.
At one point during the hearing, Rep. Eddie Farnsworth, R-Gilbert, described the incessant questioning from Rep. Martin Quezada as “political grandstanding.”
When Quezada said he wanted staff to answer whether issuing a check to Pearce later would violate the “gift clause” in the state Constitution, Farnsworth retorted that under the state Constitution, reasonable expenses can be paid and this is a provision that’s apart from the “gift clause.”
“So please explain to us how this would violate gift clause,” Farnsworth said.
The amendment doesn’t actually reimburse Pearce nor does it provide for any amount to reimburse the ousted Republican.
The amendment says a reimbursement will be made after the recalled official submits an itemized account of campaign expenses, which must be submitted within two years after the recall election.
But the Legislature – or other governing bodies in the case of officials who aren’t state officers – still must approve the expenses submitted by the recalled official.
Senate Majority Leader Andy Biggs said all the language does is “create the potentiality” to reimburse a recalled official. It doesn’t guarantee a reimbursement, he said. More
